India’s growing space capabilities,
evidenced by its PSLV rocket (above), and its growing
reliance on space, should encourage the government to take
a more strategic look at space security issues. (credit:
ISRO)

India’s space program is civilian in nature. Over the
years, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) has
developed various space systems meant to carry forward the
state’s agenda of using space technologies for the purposes
of socioeconomic development. The key focus of India’s
space program would continue to develop space systems that
would offer social, scientific and economic benefits.

Broadly, space security could be associated towards
securing the nation’s space systems and other related
infrastructure.

Investments in outer space technologies have been used
by India for various economic, security, and foreign policy
initiatives. Simultaneously, the challenges in regards to
the security of space assets have also amplified with the
increase in space assets. Apart from space weather and
space debris, the danger to space systems and associated
ground infrastructure has also increased because of the
counter-space capabilities developed by some nations.
Overall, the notion of space security means differently to
different nations depending on their actual threat
perceptions.

Broadly, space security could be associated towards
securing the nation’s space systems and other related
infrastructure. It could involve developing satellite
hardening and other types of protection technologies. Space
security could be also about developing secure
reconnaissance, communication, and navigation systems with
an appropriate redundancy factor. Depending on the threat
perception, the nation would also be required to develop a
deterrence mechanism in form of counter-space capabilities.

Threat perception in Indian context

As a sovereign state during its more than six decades of
existence, India has fought three and half wars with its
neighbors, Pakistan and China. India shares significant
geographical borders with these two nations and have
various unresolved border disputes. All three nations are
nuclear weapons capable and have a significant inventory of
missiles.

During last few decades, China’s performance in the
outer space arena has been praiseworthy and they have
successfully completed various technologically challenging
projects. At the same time in the post-Cold War era, China
is the only state to conduct a significant anti-satellite (ASAT)
test, in January 2007, giving rise to a significant amount
of hazardous space debris. Subsequently, China has also
undertaken several missions where their intentions behind
conducting certain experiments in space are unclear. Very
recently, a maneuver made by Chinese satellites (possibly
using a mechanical arm on one satellite to grab another
satellite) has further increased the suspicion about their
possible intent. Hence, India needs to factor in China’s
investments in counter-space capabilities in its strategic
appreciation of threat matrix.

At the global level, the United States often does not
disclose the details of all the experiments they undertake
in outer space. For example, there have been three flights
of the robotic X-37 spaceplane since 2010, with no clarity
regarding its exact purpose. Also, in 2002, the US
unilaterally withdrew from the Treaty on the Limitation of
Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM Treaty, 1971). This
essentially was the message to Russia and the rest of the
world that the US would not like to be hostage to any legal
architecture limiting their missile defense activities. All
this indicates that they are against forming any strong and
binding space legal architecture. Also, in order to address
the Chinese challenge, the US could increase their
activities in the counter-space technology area. This may
eventually lead to the development of a military space race
between the US and China, indirectly affecting India.

Legal architecture

Technically, the existing treaty mechanism expects outer
space to be used for peaceful purposes; however, the term
“peaceful purposes” has no exact definition. Also, there is
no clarity in regards to definition of “space weapons” and
“weaponization of space.” It is obvious that defining any
“boundary value” for what is acceptable and what is not
could create problems for the missile defense agendas of
nation-states, hence, ambiguity could be the mostly
desirable option for some nations.

Currently, the global efforts to establish any viable
arms control/disarmament arrangement fall far short of
developing any treaty mechanism. The United Nations (UN)
efforts by establishing the Committee on the Peaceful Uses
of Outer Space (COPOUS), and discussions about the
Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS), have met
with little success.

Broadly, space security could be
associated towards securing the nation’s space systems
and other related infrastructure.

Presently, three ideas are under consideration among the
global community. One is the Group of Governmental Experts
(GGE) on Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures (TCBMs)
in Outer Space Activities. This group was established by
the Secretary-General of the UN in 2012 and has already
submitted its final report, which has now also been made
public. Since outer space is inherently a multilateral
domain, this group has proposed various TCBMs. The GGE
expects states to review and implement various TCBMs
through relevant national mechanisms on a voluntary basis.
It is important to note that, in 1992, another GGE report
was submitted to the UN, but no progress was made to
contextualize this report for developing any space policy
mechanism.

The second is the much discussed European Union (EU)
sponsored Space Code of Conduct (CoC). Presently, the CoC
is probably in concluding stages of debate with the fourth
draft of this code in circulation. The next meeting to
discuss this code will take place in November in Bangkok.

The final proposal is the draft treaty called The Treaty
on Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space
and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space
Objects (PPWT), introduced in 2008 by Russia and China.
Presently, Russia is working on the second draft of this
treaty mechanism.

Essentially both the GGE and CoC are soft laws and are
voluntary and non-binding in nature. It is well known that
developing a treaty mechanism is an extremely
time-consuming and laborious process. As such, the idea of
PPWT had almost no backers when it was initially
introduced. All this indicates that a mechanism with
inbuilt transparency is unlikely to be realized soon.

Possible options

Given this international backdrop, India needs to
develop its policy options in the space domain. Today,
India has a fast developing, technologically superior, and
yet economically viable space program. From the mid 1970s
to 2005, Indian space program had suffered significantly
due to imposition of a sanctions regime in response to
India’s nuclear policies. India did not receive much
technological assistance from any country during this
period. India was welcomed in the mainstream only after the
Indo-US deal was signed in 2005. Eventually the US
administration moved ISRO off of the so-called Entity List,
in an effort to drive hi-tech trade and forge closer
strategic ties with India, only in 2011.

Interestingly, this technological apartheid worked for
India in different ways: on one hand, it delayed various
projects significantly but, at the same time, it also led
to the process of indigenization of space technology.
Presently, India is slowly making its presence felt in the
multi-billion-dollar space transportation market. ISRO’s
Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) rocket has developed
a great reputation in the global market and is expected to
launch minimum of seven satellites over next two years for
international customers. ISRO has also made some inroads in
some other fields of space market as well.

Any strategy suggestions for India’s space schema should
factor in various such geostrategic and commercial aspects.
The following are a few suggestions:

White paper

The Indian space program started in the early 1960s and
has made significant progress since those humble origins.
Important information explaining major potential evolutions
in space activities and policies in India has been made
available by the government and space commission from time
to time. However, there is a need to have a comprehensive
document that could put into context India’s overall
philosophy about its space agenda. It should be a simple
(not technical) document that would present the social,
technological, economic, foreign policy, and strategic
aspects of India’s space program. It should highlight the
ongoing nature of program and explain its future roadmap.
Details about the commercial aspects of the space program
and the role of private industry also should be
highlighted. Also, a national space legal architecture
needs to be developed.

Privatization

The primary focus of ISRO is research and development.
They design, develop, and execute various programs in the
national interest. There is a constant demand for their
products internationally on commercial terms, too. This
involves selling of various data, the design and
development of satellites to various clients, and providing
launch facilities. ISRO has established its commercial arm,
called Antrix Corporation, to cater to those commercial
interests. However, the physical delivery of the product
has to be completed by ISRO only, which puts an additional
burden on this organization.

It is important for ISRO to transfer the commercially
necessary portion of technology to private industry and
encourage that industry to develop a suitable business
model. For example, ISRO has already suggested that PSLV
facilities required for the launch of small and medium
satellites could be privatized. There is a need to exploit
such ideas further. Private industry should also be
encouraged to produce and trade various other products
developed by ISRO.

World Space Council

A few years ago, India’s former president, Dr APJ Abdul
Kalam, brought forwarded the concept of overseeing
international space security with an international space
force for such operations as Space Situational Awareness (SSA),
space navigation, space traffic management, space debris
removal, in orbit servicing, space rescue, space solar
power, and other issues of importance that demand global
participation.

From the space security
perspective, it is vital for various government organs
involved in defense and foreign policy issues to work
together and formulate policies regarding strategic
requirements and issues concerning counter-space
capabilities.

Currently, many nations are found reluctant to opt for
any strong space regime based on hard law. Any soft law
approach is expected to have inbuilt limitations and may
bring in ambiguity to the global space arrangement.
Therefore, the possibility exists that the activities of a
few nation-states could pose significant challenges to
space security in future. To significantly dilute the
limitations of soft law mechanisms, there is a need to have
a structure where states could operate together globally.
Such a broad-based structure could assist to bring in
transparency and develop confidence amongst the
nation-states. India, perhaps, should take the initiative
towards the development of World Space Council.

Space Command

There have been some media reports regarding the
possible formation of a Space Command as a part of India’s
security architecture. It is obvious that the Indian armed
forces and their space cells would have a better
appreciation regarding to their present and future needs in
that case. In addition, such a structure should also cater
to the needs of paramilitary forces. The issues
particularly concerning space and cyber activities do have
a significant amount of “civil” component to it. Hence,
this command needs to have built-in flexibility in their
approach for dealing with civilian government and
non-government agencies, industry, and international
agencies. The idea of developing Space Command should be
taken to its logical conclusion.

ASATs

The reality is that, since the beginning of the space
era, various spacefaring and other nations with interests
in space have failed to evolve any global space regime. The
present global space politics and positioning demonstrates
that the EU and the US, and probably Japan, have a similar
view about the future space architecture and are keen to
have a soft law mechanism. Meanwhile, Russia and China have
apparently no objections to soft law but may prefer to
develop a treaty mechanism.

So far, India’s experience in global negotiations in
respect of arms control and disarmament issues has not been
very encouraging. The current Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty (NPT) essentially caters for the interests of five
nuclear weapon states. In the field of chemical weapons as
well, some have observed that the US and Russia, who have
pressurized Syria to give up its chemical weapons, have
actually defaulted from the treaty mechanism and are
expected to take a decade more to destroy their own
chemical weapons stockpiles. India also has no pleasant
experiences in regards to negotiations on the Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). Recently, India abstained
from voting in favor of a global Arms Trade Treaty (ATT)
when it became evident that this treaty is more favorable
to the arms exporting states. Overall, it is unlikely that,
in near future, any strong arms control or disarmament
regime would emerge at global level that could largely
guarantee space security.

On the other hand, India’s security challenges are far
too complex. India’s both nuclear neighbors have kept a
sustained focus on military modernization. China’s
investments into outer space arena are noteworthy. India’s
concerns are more about the possibility of weaponization of
space by China. It could be argued that China’s interests
in ASAT and space weapons are more US-centric than
India-centric. However, from India’s point of view, the
concern is about China’s counter-space capability.
Eventually, such capability could also offer China an
asymmetric advantage against India.

For India, weaponization of space is not an option and
it should be avoided at any cost. However, what is
important for India is for it to build its technological
capabilities. India should build its technological
capabilities for debris-free ASAT competence: the
capability for any possible interception at about 150 to
250 kilometers above the earth’s surface.

Strategic Space Commission

Various Indian investments in space are for peaceful
purposes. India has more than US$25–30 billion worth of
space assets and has major impending projects.
Theoretically, there is no protection available for any of
India’s space assets.

India’s multifaceted security challenges demands the
security establishment to remain in a constant state of
readiness. Naturally, space technologies would find
increasing utility for India’s security setup in the near
future. It is obvious that the development of military
follows technology development logic. The development of
the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) in India’s
strategic calculus demands information superiority. India’s
requirement of reconnaissance, communications, and
navigation necessitates the presence of a space-based
architecture.

India’s existing Space Commission, which is an
overarching body to decide and execute its overall space
agenda, has a framework of a civilian mandate. It is
important for ISRO, as an executor of India’s space vision,
to maintain its existing identity integral to the nation’s
policies. Also, it is important for ISRO to enhance India’s
commercial stakes in the global space market by encouraging
the private industry.

Now the time has come for Indian
technocrats and policy makers to place this program
under the global settings of space technology, space
law, and space security.

From the space security perspective, it is vital for
various government organs involved in defense and foreign
policy issues to work together and formulate policies
regarding strategic requirements and issues concerning
counter-space capabilities. In the future, with possible
technological breakthroughs various new issues in areas
such as stations, space tourism, on-orbit satellite
servicing, and the management of mineral resources on the
Moon and other planets could arise. This could change the
nature of outer space dynamics and increase security
challenges. Such technological achievements could be
required to be channeled mainly by using various strategic
and diplomatic leverages.

In order to cater for various existing and emerging
space security challenges, two separate space commissions
could be put in place: a National Space Commission and a
Strategic Space Commission.

Conclusion

India’s space program had humble origins in the early
1960s but has made exponential progress during the last few
decades. During that time, Indian rocket scientists have
brought many laurels to country. Now, the time has come for
Indian technocrats and policy makers to place this program
under the global settings of space technology, space law,
and space security.

Disclaimer: This article is an academic and
personal view.

Dr. Ajey Lele works at the
Institute For Defence Studies
and Analyses (IDSA), a New Delhi-based think tank on
security issues. He is a postgraduate in physics and has a
doctorate in international relations. His research focus is
on strategic technologies and WMD related issues. He has
several publications to his credit.